蘋果公司採購生態系統的價值捕獲：供應商股東報酬之個案研究

Abstract

This case study examines how Apple Inc. captures a disproportionate share of financial value within its global supply chain by analysing the long-term financial performance of its publicly listed suppliers. Using compound annual growth rate (CAGR) as a proxy for value capture, the study assesses whether Apple’s suppliers achieve comparable shareholder returns to Apple itself, the S&P 500, and the Vanguard Total World ETF. The analysis covers suppliers identified in Apple’s Supplier Lists from 2011 to 2023, with financial data obtained from Yahoo Finance using adjusted closing prices to ensure dividend-adjusted performance. Suppliers were segmented by geography, Kraljic Matrix classification, Apple revenue exposure, relationship length, and operating margin. The findings reveal a clear performance gap: Apple’s suppliers, on average, achieved a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of just 5.6%, significantly lower than Apple’s 25.6% and the market benchmarks. Leverage and Routine suppliers posted the weakest CAGRs, while Bottleneck and Strategic suppliers performed relatively better but still underperformed Apple. Supplier profitability exhibited the strongest positive correlation with long-term performance, suggesting that financially resilient firms are better positioned to sustain growth in buyer-dominated ecosystems. This case study contributes to procurement and supply chain literature by integrating shareholder return data with supplier segmentation, offering a new perspective on value capture asymmetry in global value chains. The results highlight the importance of supplier financial health and challenge assumptions about mutual value creation in buyer-driven ecosystems like Apple’s.

This case study examines how Apple Inc. captures a disproportionate share of financial value within its global supply chain by analysing the long-term financial performance of its publicly listed suppliers. Using compound annual growth rate (CAGR) as a proxy for value capture, the study assesses whether Apple’s suppliers achieve comparable shareholder returns to Apple itself, the S&P 500, and the Vanguard Total World ETF. The analysis covers suppliers identified in Apple’s Supplier Lists from 2011 to 2023, with financial data obtained from Yahoo Finance using adjusted closing prices to ensure dividend-adjusted performance. Suppliers were segmented by geography, Kraljic Matrix classification, Apple revenue exposure, relationship length, and operating margin. The findings reveal a clear performance gap: Apple’s suppliers, on average, achieved a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of just 5.6%, significantly lower than Apple’s 25.6% and the market benchmarks. Leverage and Routine suppliers posted the weakest CAGRs, while Bottleneck and Strategic suppliers performed relatively better but still underperformed Apple. Supplier profitability exhibited the strongest positive correlation with long-term performance, suggesting that financially resilient firms are better positioned to sustain growth in buyer-dominated ecosystems. This case study contributes to procurement and supply chain literature by integrating shareholder return data with supplier segmentation, offering a new perspective on value capture asymmetry in global value chains. The results highlight the importance of supplier financial health and challenge assumptions about mutual value creation in buyer-driven ecosystems like Apple’s.